Maine votes out electoral college

[StoneByStone]

New York made after birth abortion legal.

Source?

 

[leaningright]

By that logic, your state gets the Governor that Oklahoma City and Tulsa vote for and the small rural towns/counties do not get a say.

But I doubt you have ever complained about the out sized influence of Tulsa and Oklahoma City, so your opposition to the EC must be based on an unstated reason.

The bottom line is that government by the minority is neither just, equitable, fair, democratic, or sustainable.

Actually I do gripe about OKC and Tulsa. We can never have a decent Democrat for our governor (which I would like) because of all the republicans in those cities...especially OKC. But that’s our system and I deal with it. The EC is the US’s system.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Instituting direct democracy in a country like the United States, just because you lost the election, would be a travesty and would ruin the country. You guys are idiots.

Just like the JPP liberals wanting the Thread Ban feature on this site, prior to them suddenly realizing that it was used against them, they are all agog over what they FEEL will give them a victory and yet, then haven't bothered to realize that it could backfire on the liberals; which will then mean, they'll be screaming that everyone needs to return to the method that was put in the Constitution.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

We would elect the president the same way we elect our representatives, one person, one vote, majority rules.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

See, things changed and so should this, the electoral college should be abolished. You know women and blacks vote now, they weren’t allowed to originally.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Wow, you totally have this thread.

I cannot even add anything, you have totally nailed the essence of this.

A modern, just, fair society should not be having governments that are routinely elected by the minority.

That is not sustainable.

If you cannot sell your ideas to a majority or plurality of the voters, you have no business having a stranglehold on the national government in the 21st century.

 

[Flash]

Among world democracies, the U.S. is practically unique in disallowing citizens to directly elect head of state or head of government - and the only world democracy that allows the minority to dictate who controls the national government, aka government by the minority.

In many of those systems the president (or monarch) is the head of state while the prime minister is the head of government. So, the head of government is not directly elected by the voters; or, the legislative body appoints the cabinet including pm. The president may appoint the pm who is the head of the majority party--so the elected president is not often the head of government.

Those 65 of the world's 125 democracies that directly elects the president does not elect the head of government who runs the country. The president is head of state and largely symbolic (like the queen).

Belgium: Federal Parliament approves the Cabinet of Belgium
Denmark: The Monarch appoints, based on recommendations from the leaders of the parties in Folketinget, the cabinet leader
Finland: Parliament of Finland appoints the Cabinet of Finland
Germany:Bundestag elects the Federal Chancellor
Greece: Hellenic Parliament approves the Cabinet of Greece
Norway: The Monarch appoints the MP leading the largest party or coalition
Spain: The Congress of Deputies elects the President of the Government
Sweden: The Riksdag elects the Prime Minister, who in turn appoints the other members of the Government
Switzerland: A United Federal Assembly elects the members of the Swiss Federal Council
UK: The monarch appoints the MP leading the largest party or coalition in the House of Commons as Prime Minister
Australia: Leader of the political party that has the support of a majority in the Australian House of Representatives is appointed Prime Minister of Australia
Canada: Leader of the political party that has the support of a majority in the House of Commons of Canada is appointed Prime Minister of Canada
Japan: National Diet nominates the Prime Minister who appoints the Cabinet of Japan

 

[USFREEDOM911]

You didn't tell us how the direct election would work. Would a majority be required. If not, would there be a runoff. Would there be a minimum percentage of votes required to become president?

And what would happen, as it is now, where a large percentage don't vote; because wouldn't that mean that the one person / one vote would be unqualified??

 

[MSgt]

I think all of the blue states should start awarding Electors based upon district, and red states (minus Nebraska) should remain status quo.

 

[Sirthinksalot]

You get a "participation trophy."

Shrillary never got her participation trophy. Maybe that's why she's still so mad.

 

[Cinnabar]

And Georgia recently made abortion illegal. New York made after birth abortion legal.

You don't realize that what you stated is an oxymoron? Hw does one abort after a birth has already taken place?

 

[Yurt]

if it wasnt just ONE party always benefiting from winning without getting more votes maybe people wouldn't want to get rid of the electoral college


we could just end the republican parties cheating


but getting rid of it helps KEEP them from cheating to manipulate this needless old relic of past days

How is something Constitutional, cheating?

 

[Yurt]

One American, One Vote.
A Californian’s vote should count as equally as a Nebraskan’s vote.

Anyone can play that geography game. 70,000 people in only three medium-sized states decided for the rest of us that a dunce who got blown out in the popular vote should be allowed to be president.

A lot of small, rural red states have more cows and corn fields than people.
Cows and corn fields do not vote, and they are not entitled to representation.

The small, rural, conservative states are already given vastly disproportionate power and advantage by over-representation in the U.S. Senate and by district gerrymandering in the House.

There is no plausible need that tiny, rural states need to also be given a disproportionate advantage in presidential elections. They are given more than enough disproportionate power and representation as it is.

So they just shouldn't count and have no voice.....

 

[Moosakofsky]

Source?

Da internets.

 

[Moosakofsky]

You don't realize that what you stated is an oxymoron? Hw does one abort after a birth has already taken place?

I dunno. Da internets said so.

 

[dukkha]

2020 is much more front-loaded with larger states like CA having early primaries. That should eliminate many of the weaker candidates and narrow it down early.

not good either. Primaries need to be strung out a bit so we can see who has staying power, or late surges

 

[PostmodernProphet]

You don't realize that what you stated is an oxymoron? Hw does one abort after a birth has already taken place?

sharp knife, blunt instrument, chemical poisoning, simple strangulation.......did Virginia specify method or simply make it legal?.......

 

[Earl]

"Amendment procedures outlined in the U.S. ConstitutionArticle V of the U.S. Constitution outlines two methods for introducing amendments to the U.S. Constitution. These methods are:a) Two-thirds of each house of Congress votes to amend the U.S. Constitutionfollowed by three-fourths of the state legislatures (or conventions of the state legislatures) approving of the amendment. b) A national convention where two-thirds of all states are represented votes to introduce an amendment followed by three-fourths of the state legislatures (or conventions of the state legislatures) approving of the amendment. Both circumstances require that three-fourths of the state legislatures (or conventions of the state legislatures) approve an amendment before it becomes part of the U.S. Constitution. The second method, where amendments are introduced in state legislatures, has never been successfully used. All ratified amendments have been proposed in Congress. The amendment procedure in many ways reflects a states’ rights approach, where the state legislatures or their conventions are responsible for ratifying all amendmentswhether introduced by national convention or in Congress"

Lots of luck with that.

 

[Althea]

Why don't we let the parents do that?

Oh, I don't know. Maybe because birth control is illegal, and they are now forced to have numerous children that they cannot afford?

 

[Aimée]

Its no use. Ya don't think this will go the courts where there is a SCOTUS precedent that declares that no STATE has the authority to add any more regulations than exists in the Constitution when a state is charged with regulating any federal election? In other words.....no state can do away with the requirements for federal elections nor can they add anything extra than is preexisting in the constitution. Just more noise from the left.....just ask the good folks from the state of Ark.

Simply read the SCOTUS decision and precedent establishing case U.S Term Limits Inc., v. Ray Thornton 514 U.S. 779 (1995). This case involves a state attempting to change the rules concerning the election and term limits of US congressmen and women......it clearly states that no state has the right to deny BALLOT ACCESS in a federal election by adding extra conditions to those found to exist in the Untied States Constitution. Read it and weep.

No, it won't go to the courts because they're not voting it out. What they are doing is changing the way the electoral college would vote for president. They're wanting to change it to whoever won the popular vote. It's up to the individual state as to how they handle those votes.